Case 1603493/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Andrea Rees v M C Morgan Optometrists Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 1603493/2025
- Decision date
- 19 May 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Moore
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Andrea Rees
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the Wales Employment Tribunal on 10 September 2025. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge S Moore decided that a determination could properly be made of the claim, or part of it, under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
The tribunal recorded that Andrea Rees was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. M C Morgan Optometrists Limited was ordered to pay damages of £3,296.64 gross for that claim.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £6,181.80 gross. It further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £389.19 gross. The total sum ordered was £9,867.63, with the claimant responsible for any tax and employee national insurance due.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Damages awarded gross for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £3,297 |
| Redundancy | Redundancy payment awarded gross after the judgment recorded that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy. | Upheld | — | £6,182 |
| Holiday pay | Gross award for unpaid holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £389 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,868
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.